Cisco Switch or router?

Cisco Switch or router?

Post by Yoann Roma » Mon, 31 Dec 2001 10:44:03



I've got four "networks" setup, using private IP addressing:

10.0.1.0 / 255.255.255.240
10.0.2.0 / 255.255.255.224
10.0.3.0 / 255.255.255.240
10.0.4.0 / 255.255.255.240

Each network has a hub/switch or series of hub/switches to connect all of
the devices. Then, the top switch/hub for each workgroup connects to a
"backbone switch". What I call the backbone switch is in fact a Kingston
Layer 2 10/100 Mbps switch. I'm pretty sure I need to replace this switch
with a routing switch.

I'd like to be able to have a network switch/router/swouter/whatever in
which I can specify routes:
ip route 10.0.1.0 255.255.255.240 e0
ip route 10.0.2.0 255.255.255.224 e1
ip route 10.0.3.0 255.255.255.240 e2
ip route 10.0.4.0 255.255.255.240 e3
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 e4
.... and so on ....

Does Cisco have such a product that is affordable to small businesses? In
short, I'd like the routing power of a Cisco 2500 but in a switch form with
6 to 8 Ethernet ports (and a plus would be the possibility to have a slot
for a 100FX fiber module).

Thanks.

 
 
 

Cisco Switch or router?

Post by Mike » Mon, 31 Dec 2001 11:48:00


Well...  one thought is to get an 2924 with enterprise software one it..
config vlans for each subnet with say.. 5 ports to each.. hang a 2620 off
port A or B and trunk it so you can route between the vlans.. hang cheap
switches off each one of the 5 ports on a VLAN and go nuts.

If you buy this stuff used, 500 for the switch and about 1200 for the router
on Ebay and careful shopping.

MikeS

--
Find me at www-dot-packetattack-dot-com


Quote:> I've got four "networks" setup, using private IP addressing:

> 10.0.1.0 / 255.255.255.240
> 10.0.2.0 / 255.255.255.224
> 10.0.3.0 / 255.255.255.240
> 10.0.4.0 / 255.255.255.240

> Each network has a hub/switch or series of hub/switches to connect all of
> the devices. Then, the top switch/hub for each workgroup connects to a
> "backbone switch". What I call the backbone switch is in fact a Kingston
> Layer 2 10/100 Mbps switch. I'm pretty sure I need to replace this switch
> with a routing switch.

> I'd like to be able to have a network switch/router/swouter/whatever in
> which I can specify routes:
> ip route 10.0.1.0 255.255.255.240 e0
> ip route 10.0.2.0 255.255.255.224 e1
> ip route 10.0.3.0 255.255.255.240 e2
> ip route 10.0.4.0 255.255.255.240 e3
> ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 e4
> .... and so on ....

> Does Cisco have such a product that is affordable to small businesses? In
> short, I'd like the routing power of a Cisco 2500 but in a switch form
with
> 6 to 8 Ethernet ports (and a plus would be the possibility to have a slot
> for a 100FX fiber module).

> Thanks.

-----=  Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News  =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
 Check out our new Unlimited Server. No Download or Time Limits!
-----==  Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers!  ==-----

 
 
 

Cisco Switch or router?

Post by Billy Bob Thornto » Mon, 31 Dec 2001 13:56:38


Rather than mess with a Popsicle (router on a stick) why not go with the
2948-L3 (WS-C2948G-L3)?  This switch seems to be one of Cisco's best kept
secrets, but is in fact a very power and relatively inexpensive L3 switching
solution.  This switch has 48 FastEthernet ports and two 1000BaseX GBIC
(Fiber) ports!  There are only two downsides to this option.  The first
downside is that it does not support the integrated IOS.  The integrated IOS
combines the routing and switching IOS into one entity eliminating the need
to switch between the SUP and Router module.  I've come to love the
integrated IOS.  The other downside is that if this sounds good you had
better get one (two, three, the rest) now, while you still can because they
have been targeted for EOL. ;-(

Off topic from what I've been reading about the 2950 series I haven't been
impressed.  Comments on 2950's welcomed.

For more on the 2948-L3 visit the following links (some of it good reads):
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/pcat/c2948gl3.htm
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/cc/pd/si/casi/ca2900/prodlit/29gl3_d...
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/cc/pd/si/casi/ca2900/prodlit/1111_pp...

Cheers,
--
William Hayden (CCNP)


> Well...  one thought is to get an 2924 with enterprise software one it..
> config vlans for each subnet with say.. 5 ports to each.. hang a 2620 off
> port A or B and trunk it so you can route between the vlans.. hang cheap
> switches off each one of the 5 ports on a VLAN and go nuts.

> If you buy this stuff used, 500 for the switch and about 1200 for the
router
> on Ebay and careful shopping.

> MikeS



> > Does Cisco have such a product that is affordable to small businesses?
In
> > short, I'd like the routing power of a Cisco 2500 but in a switch form
> > with
> > 6 to 8 Ethernet ports (and a plus would be the possibility to have a
slot
> > for a 100FX fiber module).

 
 
 

Cisco Switch or router?

Post by M.C. van den Bovenkam » Mon, 31 Dec 2001 19:09:43



> Does Cisco have such a product that is affordable to small businesses? In
> short, I'd like the routing power of a Cisco 2500 but in a switch form with
> 6 to 8 Ethernet ports (and a plus would be the possibility to have a slot
> for a 100FX fiber module).

No, that small an L3 switch doesn't exist in the Cisco lineup. The
smallest L3 switch they have is the 2948G-L3, 48 x 10/100 plus 2
GBIC-based GigE ports. No 100BASE-FX, but there are the GigE ports.

That's $9.995,= list. If a 2500 is all the routing power you need, you'd
probably better off getting a 1605R (dual Ethernet) for $1495,= list and
use that.

                Regards,

                        Marco.

 
 
 

Cisco Switch or router?

Post by M.C. van den Bovenkam » Mon, 31 Dec 2001 19:14:48



> (Fiber) ports!  There are only two downsides to this option.  The first
> downside is that it does not support the integrated IOS.  The integrated IOS
> combines the routing and switching IOS into one entity eliminating the need
> to switch between the SUP and Router module.  I've come to love the
> integrated IOS.

Eh? I've played with one, and to me the 2948G-L3 looks like any other
Cisco router would look if it had two GigE and 48 10/100 ports. No
messing with separate switching and routing entities. In fact, it's far
more of a router than a switch; you even have to configure IRB if wou
want to switch with it :-).

                Regards,

                        Marco.

 
 
 

Cisco Switch or router?

Post by Billy Bob Thornto » Tue, 01 Jan 2002 04:27:35


Oops, my bad, my brain farted and I was thinking of integrated IOS on the
6500 series.  Thanks for catching that.  The integrated IOS is also more of
a routing IOS than a switch IOS.
<slinks back into the darnkness>

--
William Hayden (CCNP)




> > (Fiber) ports!  There are only two downsides to this option.  The first
> > downside is that it does not support the integrated IOS.  The integrated
IOS
> > combines the routing and switching IOS into one entity eliminating the
need
> > to switch between the SUP and Router module.  I've come to love the
> > integrated IOS.

> Eh? I've played with one, and to me the 2948G-L3 looks like any other
> Cisco router would look if it had two GigE and 48 10/100 ports. No
> messing with separate switching and routing entities. In fact, it's far
> more of a router than a switch; you even have to configure IRB if wou
> want to switch with it :-).

> Regards,

> Marco.

 
 
 

Cisco Switch or router?

Post by Walter Robers » Tue, 01 Jan 2002 04:56:46



:Rather than mess with a Popsicle (router on a stick) why not go with the
:2948-L3 (WS-C2948G-L3)?  This switch seems to be one of Cisco's best kept
:secrets, but is in fact a very power and relatively inexpensive L3 switching
:solution.  This switch has 48 FastEthernet ports and two 1000BaseX GBIC
:(Fiber) ports!  There are only two downsides to this option.  The first
:downside is that it does not support the integrated IOS.  The integrated IOS
:combines the routing and switching IOS into one entity eliminating the need
:to switch between the SUP and Router module.

The 2948G-L3 only has a single accessible module. It uses the integrated
IOS. It can be a bit of a nuisance sometimes, as there are no commands
to configure a range of interfaces for a feature -- you have to go
into each interface and configure it separately.

: I've come to love the
:integrated IOS.  The other downside is that if this sounds good you had
:better get one (two, three, the rest) now, while you still can because they
:have been targeted for EOL. ;-(

The link you provided said that the WS-C2926GS and WS-C2926GL are EOL'd,
not the WS-C2948G-L3. The only thing about the 2948G-L3 that
is EOL'd is the DC Power version: "Because of the unavailability of DC power
supplies, new orders cannot be accepted". (Same thing happened to
a number of different devices.)

Anyhow, the C2948G-L3 is interesting to be sure, but it does have
a few other weaknesses:

- blocks of 4 FE ports are controlled by the same ASIC, so there are some
things (e.g., encapsulation) that must be the same for each port
in a block

- no ACL's for FE ports. With newer releases, you can force all FE
traffic to be pushed up to the Gigabit port circuitry, to be CPU-
processed there by the same ACL controlling the incoming gigabit
traffic. This can only work properly if each FE port is part of
a different subnet, I believe. This feature is advertised as being
intended to prevent the FE ports from talking to each other.

- Some people have reported very port switching performance between
the FE ports, but good performance for routing. When I was testing
one, I did see very poor switching performance myself, but I did not
have time to chase down all the possibilities. If there is a way to
get fast switching performance, it certainly isn't *obvious*.
Some people have posted saying they now only recommend the 2948G-L3
for pure routing configurations.

 
 
 

Cisco Switch or router?

Post by Yoann Roma » Tue, 01 Jan 2002 10:25:43



: No, that small an L3 switch doesn't exist in the Cisco lineup. The
: smallest L3 switch they have is the 2948G-L3, 48 x 10/100 plus 2
: GBIC-based GigE ports. No 100BASE-FX, but there are the GigE ports.

Would this switch (Intel Express 550T) be inappropriate for this type of
setup? Approximately 50 users on all four networks, plus three web/FTP/mail
servers. The 2948G-L3 looks interesting, but offers 48 ports (where I need
about 5 to 8) and GigE ports, a plus that I don't see in the future of the
company right now. So, it's a lot of money for a bunch of features that
won't really get used in this setup. More info about the Intel switch can be
found at:
http://www.intel.com/network/connectivity/products/exp550t_f.htm

 : That's $9.995,= list. If a 2500 is all the routing power you need, you'd
: probably better off getting a 1605R (dual Ethernet) for $1495,= list and
: use that.

I looked at the 1605R; the problem is that it provides 10 Mbps connections,
where the entire network is 100 Mbps. And in-house applications are moving
towards high bandwidth use.

Thanks.

 
 
 

Cisco Switch or router?

Post by pooc » Tue, 01 Jan 2002 13:20:38


  I used the INTEL 550T before.  I was not impressed.  Sometimes, the port
switching mode would change in and out of store-and-forward for no reason,
and other times, the port would jsut shut down.  I spent endless hours on
teh phone with CS, and some serial numbers appeared to have bugs in them.
When I asked why this wasnt ANYWHERE on there product page or support pages,
they scoffed and did not give me an answer.    All in all, I was not happy
with that 550T...

Isolated incident?  Maybe, but that was one isolated incident that should
have had more public exposure since it affected some 2000 units.

-p

 
 
 

Cisco Switch or router?

Post by Yoann Roma » Wed, 02 Jan 2002 09:36:59


Thanks for the post. I was feeling pretty good about the Intel 550T, but I
will re-consider now. The second product I had in mind (since the Cisco was
too big) was the SMC6724L3.

More info:
http://www.smc.com/index.cfm?action=products_show_description&product...
C6724L3

The Intel is ideal for my case (only need 6 to 8 ports), and I wouldn't make
good use of the 24 ports of the SMC. But it, apart for the port density
difference, everything else is the same.

Just to confirm that I'm looking for the right product, could you specify
the Intel's IP address as the default gateway in workstations? So, in short,
make the workstations see the switch as a router. And could you connect an
Internet router to the Intel and tell it to route the network 0.0.0.0/0 when
all others failed?

Thanks.

 
 
 

Cisco Switch or router?

Post by Henry Y » Wed, 02 Jan 2002 17:32:48




>I've got four "networks" setup, using private IP addressing:

>10.0.1.0 / 255.255.255.240
>10.0.2.0 / 255.255.255.224
>10.0.3.0 / 255.255.255.240
>10.0.4.0 / 255.255.255.240

>Each network has a hub/switch or series of hub/switches to connect all of
>the devices. Then, the top switch/hub for each workgroup connects to a
>"backbone switch". What I call the backbone switch is in fact a Kingston
>Layer 2 10/100 Mbps switch. I'm pretty sure I need to replace this switch
>with a routing switch.

>I'd like to be able to have a network switch/router/swouter/whatever in
>which I can specify routes:
>ip route 10.0.1.0 255.255.255.240 e0
>ip route 10.0.2.0 255.255.255.224 e1
>ip route 10.0.3.0 255.255.255.240 e2
>ip route 10.0.4.0 255.255.255.240 e3
>ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 e4
>.... and so on ....

>Does Cisco have such a product that is affordable to small businesses? In
>short, I'd like the routing power of a Cisco 2500 but in a switch form with
>6 to 8 Ethernet ports (and a plus would be the possibility to have a slot
>for a 100FX fiber module).

ISTR blackbox sells a number of "backbone switches", including a modular
8/16-port box (takes TX or FX modules).  www.blackbox.com
(sorry i don't have the specific SKU, but i'm sure it's on their site).
--


Hicksville, New York
 
 
 

1. ATM, Cisco 7507 Router or IGX/MGX/BPX Switch or Cat 8500 Multiservice Switch Router?

Hi there
I was just working on a NETWORK DESIGN

HEAD OFFICE has cisco 7507 router which is supposed to support 25 ATM
E1 wan circuits

Branch to Head Office req is multi-service (video, voice, data)

Isn't it more suitable to put the IGX, MGX or BPX for ATM WAN circuit
termination and let the router do all LAYER 3 SWITCHING ?

If expensive device like IGX or MGX is put there...would there still
be a need for such high end router like 7507 ?

HOW ABOUT PUTTING HIGHT END CAT 8500 MULTISERVICE SWITCH ROUTER
instead of cisco 7507 and MGX combined ?

kindly let me have your valuable response
thanks
Atif Cheema
Systems Network Engineer
Dubai Internet City
Dubai, UAE.

2. Commodore chooses PCI

3. Trunking between Cisco switches and Cabletron SSR 2000 switch/router.

4. Calling Assembly Routines From C++ And Vice Versa

5. Cisco Layer 3 Switches/Switch Routers

6. MySQL-4.1.14 Compile Fails HP-UX 11i GCC-4.0.1

7. Maintenance of cisco switches and cisco routers

8. Architect E driver for Encad Novajet on NT4.0

9. Cisco 4000 Router > Cisco 2950 Switch problems

10. Difference b/n a Cisco Router and Cisco Switch

11. Cisco 56K Switched Configuration on a Cisco 1602-R router

12. Cisco 1720 Router and and 2950 Switches

13. cisco router/switch symbols